Alternative Name: extention is created.
Bug #2: The email address in the request is not used.
Bernhard
$ openssl version
OpenSSL 0.9.8-dev XX xxx
CVS from today 20020620
$ openssl req -in newreq.pem -text
Certificate Request:
Data:
Version: 0 (0x0)
Subject
Hi there,
On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Giudicelli Frédéric via RT wrote:
The problem is that the use oF engines should be
totaly transparent to the higher API, but apparently
it's not.
The problem is RSA_check_key() is not a general transparent RSA
function, it's designed (it would seem) to check
Hi,
[snip]
I'm not sure I understand how this can be a generic problem. If an
ENGINE implementation intends to store passed strings, ie. for use
after
the ENGINE_ctrl() command in question has returned, then it should
surely be making a local copy? There are two points that leap to
Date sent: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 15:02:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Geoff Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [openssl.org #86] Bug in RSA_check_key
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just my two cents on the
Geoff Thorpe via RT schrieb:
Hi,
Hello Geoff,
[snip]
But in the code I checked the passed string is only referenced,
not copied...
ahhh ... OK, right I'm with you now. So you see the problem is in the
ENGINE implementations, not in the library code that passes the strings
through to
From: Geoff Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [openssl.org #86] Bug in RSA_check_key Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002
15:02:36 -0400 (EDT)
.
*Maybe* ... but even then it doesn't solve the case of public keys.
Moreover, how do you
Ticket closed, as the problem is not reproducable with OpenSSL source.
It rather seems to be a redhat problem.
Best regards,
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List
#define M_PKCS12_cert_bag_type(bag) OBJ_obj2nid(bag-value.bag-type)
if the variable passed in has the name bag, this works, but otherwise
it breaks, because the second bag gets substituted as well.
-Sam
__
OpenSSL Project
Hi,
On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, a y wrote:
*Maybe* ... but even then it doesn't solve the case of public keys.
Moreover, how do you actually test a public key? What does check
actually mean in this case?
.
Cheers,
Geoff
I would suggest the following for checking RSA public keys:
I'll second that. OpenSSL works excellently in isolation, but when you come to use it
in a context in which there are *already* keys and certificate stores (eg. CAPI) it
would be excellent to be able to access those directly, so that our software has the
same familiar quirks as Microsoft's,
fontfamilyparamMonaco/paramflushleftgeoff,
the SNAP-20020620 commit builds just fine now . looks like the patch took.
now i'll do some testing
thanks!
richard
I have committed the patch that Pieter Bowman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
submitted to fix this - Richard Blake [EMAIL
11 matches
Mail list logo
